New all-electric SUV unveiled

wow anyone else have more info on these Altairnano's NanoSafeTM rechargeable nano-titanate battery program??

sounds like something to watch. lets face it, the only real hurdle to a better hybrid i.e. an affordable viable, plug in is battery tech. this sounds promising

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(clett @ Oct 4 2006, 09:20 AM) [snapback]327761[/snapback]</div>

Thanks, Clett, that's a good one, really brightened my day. Technically, these guys seem to the real deal -- that's a big company (market capitalization of >US$200M) with a safe LION battery (no thermal runaway) that'll do 9000 charge/discharge cycles. That's good enough for me. They explain both features of the battery well in terms of their novel electrode material. Nobody I found discussed cost per unit, but I guess it's a little earlyl to say. Didn't seem like the raw materials for their electrode were exotic.

Nor are they alone. You are not doubt up on these things, but I was amazed at the variety of competitors, for example:

http://www.greencarcongress.com/batteries/index.html

When I think of the world our grandchildren will live in, and in particular what the US will be like, I seldom find anything cheerful to focus on. This is cheerful.

My takeaway this AM is that these guys demonstrate, to my satisfaction, that there are no technical batteriers to PHEV and possibly to EV. That's a safe, life-of-the-car battery. And it has competitors.

So it's just a matter of time, cost, and people's preferences. An EV with a 9000 cycle battery is a 25 year car. I think the savings from vehicle longevity (with PHEV or EV) under that scenario would dwarf the fuel cost savings. This can't happen fast enough to suit me.

 

The "hurdle" of appropriate, safe batteries hasn't been much more than an ant hill for at least the past 10 years. Longer if you include the excellent advanced tech Panasonic Lead Acid batteries.

Regardless, the batteries are here. We just need the driving public to pull their heads out of the sand (not what I'd intended to write the first time), and we need the big boys to start building cars with them.

I currently have 40k miles on 10-year-old battery technology (and 4-year-old batteries) that show ZERO degredation. Imagine a car today with today's batteries.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(clett @ Oct 4 2006, 08:20 AM) [snapback]327761[/snapback]</div>

It's actually a potential recharge time of 10 minutes. Remember, thats a hell of a lot of energy that needs to be pumped into those batteries. With a proper charging station, i'm sure 10 minutes is feasable. however, in order for it to go to mass production, they likely have to work out some deal to plug it into the wall, which would be significantly longer.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Oct 4 2006, 10:07 AM) [snapback]327825[/snapback]</div>

I actually did a double take before i realized that you hadn't writen what i expected :lol:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(clett @ Oct 4 2006, 10:20 PM) [snapback]327761[/snapback]</div>

The battery will be 40kWh ( 200 miles * 200Wh/mile).
We need 1000A of 240V line to charge it in 10 minues. :blink:

Ken@Japan

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(ken1784 @ Oct 4 2006, 09:22 AM) [snapback]327867[/snapback]</div>

It's all quite impressive. I don't anticipate needing to recharge in 10 min.

The big question for me is, how expensive and lifetime of the batteries.

I know I can't afford them now (even if they were in mass production), but sometime in the future?


Dave M.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dmckinstry @ Oct 4 2006, 09:29 AM) [snapback]327877[/snapback]</div>

with a 200 mile range and no hybrid gas engine backup, even a 10 minute charge will tax a lot of peoples patience and will be the brunt of a major campaign against this vehicle byt the big 3

 

10 minute charge too long? I guess you've never gassed up a Yukon XL. It can be more than 20 minutes to get 30 gallons.

Nate

 

Battery technology sounds promising, but I wonder how far vehicles like this will actually go under real world conditions...not to mention, off road.

 

that is right, i never have and never will and i doubt that yukon owners value this time alone with their vehicles either.

i did take a few trips in 04 that would have exceeded the 200 mile range and 2 last year (one for a Priuschat meeting at Diablo Dam) and a trip to pick up a niece and take her from one summer band camp to another. (portland Or to Bellevue WA) but other than that, nothing else for me...

but others will need a place away from home to fill up on a regular basis and that is where charging stations come in. they will be few and far between at first so they will be busy and with everyone taking at least 12 mins (gotta have some time to get out and hooked up) or more, we are now talking something closer to an hour.

might be wrong on this, but i doubt it. but we always have to human natures resistance to change in our favor. for me, i would get this electric car for the day to day stuff and keep the Prius for those other occasions when its excellent range would be needed.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Oct 4 2006, 10:22 AM) [snapback]327929[/snapback]</div>

We already have real-world vehicles that have gone better than 300 miles. 250 if you flog the snot out of them. How often does the average driver travel more than 250 in an entire day? Not very!

Off-road will shorten the range just like it does with any vehicle due to increased rolling resistance. BUT, an EV does much better at slower speeds than an ICE vehicle simply because an electric propusion system is equally efficient at low speeds - very unlike an ICE.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveinOlyWA @ Oct 4 2006, 09:48 AM) [snapback]327891[/snapback]</div>

The big part missing here is that slow, overnight recharging will be the norm. It is cheap, easy and convenient. When you exceed the range "a few times/year" as you say... Groovy. For those times, you'll want to charge on the road, at a fast charger (and honestly, after 200 miles of driving, I have NO problem stretching my legs, eating... whatever... for half an hour. You don't have to wait for a full charge, you just take what you need and be on your way. You can "fill up" again at your destination, or anywhere there is an outlet. Fast charging will only be needed in the rare instances when folks need to exceed their normal daily range. The other 95% of the time, you just fill up at home. Cars stay parked more than 95% of every day, on average. Might as well be charging them. That takes three seconds of your time - no waiting around. You're working or sleeping or whatever it is you crazy people do when you aren't driving.

The thinking here is much different than with gas cars where we're used to having enough gas in the tank for 400 miles... but it takes us weeks to use it. In an EV you just plug in when you get home, and have your full range available at the start of the day - every day... without having to drive out of your way to visit a gas station, or fast-charger.

Just so I'm clear, and at the risk of beating this to death: MOST of the time, you will NOT spend even ten minutes charging a modern EV. You will spend about three seconds to connect it to the charger in your garage, and then go do something else. ONLY for those times when you exceed the range will you need to reacharge "on the road." And for those few times, there will likely be something attractive to do while you charger. Businesses have already figured out that they've got a captive audience. It would pay for a restaurant to install a charger out in front along the interstate.

And for gins I'll also clearly state that an EV won't be the best fit for everybody. Just most people.

Costco figured this out ten years ago, and today they're the biggest supporters of EV chargers in CA.

 

that does bring up a good point because we all have (or at least WE) to take time to get gas even if driving a Prius and filling up on average every 16 days. so would the daily charge time (say 20 seconds) plus the 3-5 times a year for an on road charge (30 minutes) really be more time than 5 minutes once a week for most normal cars?

i would love the option of plugging in and never going to a gas station again. my SO constantly fights getting gas because she hates it for one, and always seems to have to make a major production out of getting it (i fill her tank about 90% of the times just so i dont have to hear about it)

but right now i could not do the plug in thing. i live in a complex where all ultilities are paid, parking is no where near the apartment so no extention cord options here. but i would gladly move if the option to get this vehicle were doable

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Oct 4 2006, 07:38 PM) [snapback]327938[/snapback]</div>

Darell, we have had plenty of opportunity to discuss this earlier, but I couldn't resist to comment on this again. It's not a matter of how often. Perhaps most people would drive more than 300 miles per day only a few times per year. But, the question is, are they ready to do a perhaps 50.000$ investment in a car if that car wouldn't allow it? For that amount of money, most people will expect a car than does everything a traditional car does and then more. You can beat them to death with reasonable arguments, but you won't change their minds. This is why there is a big gap between technical people and marketing people.

Whether you like it or not, a 50.000$ car that has a range of only 250 miles is doomed to be a niche product. That's why I think that, from a commercial perspective, the future lies with plugin-hybrids for quite some time. Perhaps the serial hybrid like developed by Renault: with just a small range-extending diesel engine that acts like a generator. But people need the confidence that they can use their expensive car in the way they expect to use a car.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(vtie @ Oct 4 2006, 10:56 AM) [snapback]327962[/snapback]</div>

You are wrong there. At 50k, there is going to be a lot of people lining up to buy them. Have you seen all those luxury car owners spending in the neigbhood of $40k to $60k? I would pick one up if someone sell me one now at $50k.

That is why even the Tesla Roadster is selling better than expected. They already sold more than 100 for a car that has no Utility, cost $100k, and sold to only 4 regional markets in US... and done that in only 3 months. Small Car Companies like Panoz would go crazy to have those sales numbers. I would even pick a Tesla Roadster if it cost $50k.

 

Some decades ago, I worked at a technology lab with colleagues who were developing electric cars and batteries. They said then that the biggest challenge was a reliable lightweight battery that could be quickly recharged. The sodium-sulfur battery they were working on then never became viable and was abandoned. Many large corporations have been working on battery development since then, so it's good to see some progress reported.

I do remember that my colleagues developed a prototype series hybrid gasoline-electric that they said was the best bet with available technology. The electric motor provided high torque for acceleration and the engine was run in an efficient lean combustion cycle. I seem to remember them thinking that fuel efficiencies could be improved by 30% to 50%. However, the biggest advantage of the hybrid was the reduction in weight and increase in range, which is still an issue for all-electric vehicles.

One colleague described electric vehicles of the time as having the equivalent of a Fiat 500 engine, a one pint gas tank, and a trunk with 500 pounds of lead in it! That pretty much described the performance and range of the 1970's electric vehicles.

It's my belief that hybrids will still offer much better bang for the buck in the near future and that it'll be some while before these new battery technologies become mature enough for the market place. My guess would be an evolution of the hybrid to larger batteries with a plug-in capability and improved electric performance before we see a commercially viable all-electric vehicle.

Mike

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(darelldd @ Oct 4 2006, 12:38 PM) [snapback]327938[/snapback]</div>

Yeh, good point about an EV doing well at low speeds; all of that available torque might be very handy indeed.

I'm just a little wary about range estimates, though...just like the EPA numbers, real world will prob'ly be somewhat less.

With EV's, my preference is to halve the range numbers given by their often optmistic manufacturers. And 100+ real world miles doesn't sound like quite enough to me.

Besides, the battery wouldn't be drawn down to almost empty, would it?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Oct 4 2006, 12:47 PM) [snapback]328010[/snapback]</div>

Appearently the batteries are tortured in the RAV-4EV and similar vehicles of that vintage. I've heard of people draining the batteries. Sitting on the side of the road for a few minutes and then driving a little more. I don't know how they produce the estimates, but it's probably a lot easier to make a decent esitmate because I doubt the efficiency of the EV system is as variable as the efficiency of an ICE. ICEs' efficiency is pretty variable depending on the driving conditions and the driving style. I'm not sure how EV efficiency varies with motor RPM. I think the torque curve drops of pretty fast above 1-2K RPMs, but then again once you're at cruising speed you need very little torque. Does anybody have a better knowlege of this stuff? I'd be interested to know.